Author Topic: Improved Efficiencies & Mechanization for Track Building?  (Read 876 times)

Russ Nelson

  • Museum Member
  • Gandy Dancer
  • *
  • Posts: 14
    • View Profile
Re: Improved Efficiencies & Mechanization for Track Building?
« Reply #45 on: October 14, 2017, 11:41:20 PM »
On April 28, 1869, during construction of the transcontinental railroad, crews built 10 miles in one day, a record that still stands.
Yes, and then they had to go back and rebuild it, because it was done so shoddily. They were getting paid by the mile, not by the usable mile. I'm pretty sure that the rails we laid Saturday morning for Mill Spur won't have to be redone. Lined and tamped, yes, but we were running trains on it Saturday afternoon and Sunday.

Russ Nelson

  • Museum Member
  • Gandy Dancer
  • *
  • Posts: 14
    • View Profile
Re: Improved Efficiencies & Mechanization for Track Building?
« Reply #46 on: October 15, 2017, 12:11:20 AM »
My apologies for not being able to give credit where credit is due, but a fellow standing next to me suggested that if we had a chute that guided the stone from the side of the flat into the gauge, that would let us unload the stone flats in record time. I added a few suggestions, like the chute should have wheels and ride on the rail head, and should be repositionable from one stake pocket to another.

But on my way home, I reconsidered that. On a day when you're laying ties and rails, you've got a lot of people. They can empty the stone train faster than it can be loaded, with six people to a side. I agree with my anonymous maker friend that it would be faster, but in terms of the system as a whole, it's an efficiency that's not needed.

A better efficiency, having laid track on both the Mill Spur on Saturday and the Main Line on Sunday, would be to get the grade as close to lined as possible. The Mill Spur was pretty darned flat. The Main Line was not, having had recently been culverted and filled with rip-rap.  I realize the world is not a perfect place, and that some improvements are already understood even if not always implementable. I'm just voting for a smooth railbed as my favorite.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2017, 04:29:57 AM by Russ Nelson »

Joe Fox

  • Museum Member
  • Engineer
  • ****
  • Posts: 621
    • View Profile
Re: Improved Efficiencies & Mechanization for Track Building?
« Reply #47 on: October 15, 2017, 02:08:30 AM »
Bill, yes I believe to original railroads record was a half mile.

Carl Soderstrom

  • Museum Member
  • Hostler
  • ***
  • Posts: 208
    • View Profile
Re: Improved Efficiencies & Mechanization for Track Building?
« Reply #48 on: October 16, 2017, 04:07:47 AM »
To read more about the track laying race read:

"Nothing Like It In The World"

It was a bet between The CP & The UP. There was considerable staging.
The CP waited till the UP had less than 10 miles to the meeting point so they could not
duplicate the feat.
The CP even took an hour for lunch.


Bill Sample

  • Museum Member
  • Hostler
  • ***
  • Posts: 292
    • View Profile
Re: Improved Efficiencies & Mechanization for Track Building?
« Reply #49 on: October 18, 2017, 02:19:21 PM »
Somewhat related to Russ Nelson's comments on directing ballast into the gauge - occasionally we have had one or two ballast handlers on the flat car - usually after it's partially emptied - pushing stone off the side with someone on the ground holding a shovel up in front of them to reflect and direct the stone under the car. This does make life easier for the ground crew.  It does take coordination and doesn't work where the car's trucks are located.

Mike Fox

  • Museum Member
  • Superintendent
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,250
    • View Profile
Re: Improved Efficiencies & Mechanization for Track Building?
« Reply #50 on: October 18, 2017, 06:54:25 PM »
I had thought of a simple deflector that hung on the stake pockets, but never got any further than the design in my head. Very simple.
Mike
Doing way too much to list...